Accommodating religion christian gay lesbian dating site

We do not have groups mobilising to press home the point that unicorns are imaginary or that fairies are not living at the bottom of the garden (maybe I spoke too soon?

Thus Stedman's article falls apart because it;s based on the Composition fallacy and Fallacy of Moderation that Atheists are a distinct group of people with the same goal, and thus should behave in a coordinated way, and that there is a middle position to be assumed by accommodating religion by "understanding" it in the same way as a theologian would.It doesn't work because 'authorities' are wrong about a number of things. This sort of accommodation of religion puts Atheists on the back foot immediately where there is no need to concede ground. these are the only tools required to criticise religion. It is the claims of the pious that require examination.So we can ignore Stedman's plea about not using simplistic tools to berate religion because it's not needed. Do not let people say that you need some sort of specialist knowledge to refute the claims made within the Bible or any other religious book. All methods of interaction will work on some level.Bear in mind that this is a book which has been claimed to have been written by the almighty god - surely such a god would have intended such a book to have been accessible by all of mankind. But there is another reason why the Bible has been hijacked by Theologians who claim that all of humanity cannot understand it... Tell enough people that they can read something but will never understand it unless they defer to an "expert" is simplest way of creating a hierarchy of influence and power.There are only a few reasons I can think of why you would need someone to read a book to you. Illiteracy was the root cause of why people initially fell into this trap.

Search for accommodating religion:

All debaters that I have seen on the pious side, from all faiths, highlight this as a weakness of their Atheist counterpart.